Computing desk
< October 11	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 13 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 12[edit]

"Wireless-G" vs. "Wireless-N" routers[edit]

If I have a 3Mpbs cable modem Internet connection and a small apartment, do I have any need for a "Wireless-N" router, or will a "Wireless-G" router suffice? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A wireless-G router (capable of 54mbps at a maximum and in a small apartment should easily get well over 3Mbps in all areas) should suffice. Bear in mind it's no direct benefit having a wireless-N router if all the wireless modems in laptops/whatever are 802.11G. If you have multiple computers and are likely to use LAN to transfer files or whatever having a wireless-N router along with 802.11N modems would generally be beneficial. I'm presuming of course you'll use the wireless-N router as the only wireless access point in your apartment. Also if your cable modem is capable of bursting above 3Mbps (I believe this is reasonable common but don't know much since cable is very rare in NZ) then there may be advantages for the internet side having the wireless-N router although even then I somewhat doubt it. Nil Einne (talk) 02:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to consider whether the only use for the wireless is communicating with the internet. If there's any communication between devices on the local network (e.g. printing, file sharing) then a faster network will bring benefits. --Phil Holmes (talk) 07:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The transition to 802.11N is also tricky in the fact that you have three types of Wireless-N equipment: N only, Dual Band (b/g OR n), and Simultaneous Dual Band (b/g AND n). If you are running a wireless network that will have old and new devices on it, invest in a router that says "Simultaneous Dual Band" on the packaging unless you are absolutely sure that the "Dual Band" router can do b/g and n at the same time. That said, aside from speed considerations, 802.11n also tends to have a longer range so take that into consideration if your 802.11g router has a weak (and subsequently slow) signal in certain areas, the signal strength and speed will be greater with most 802.11n equipment. Also keep in mind that in order to use 802.11b/g/n, you will need the cooresponding wireless card in your laptop/computer/wireless device. You won't need the same brand, but look for the same letter on the wireless technology it uses. 206.131.39.6 (talk) 19:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you certain about that? From what I can tell dualband 802.11n is different from what you describe. It's not something I know much about but our article mentions it supports 2.4ghz and 5ghz. Dual band 802.11n devices support 2.4ghz and 5ghz which makes sense since that's what dualband usually means, using two different frequency bandwidths. However a device without dualband still supports 802.11n it just doesn't support the 5ghz frequency. Similarly a non simultaneous dualband device should still be able to support 802.11n and b/g, it just can't do it with the 5ghz frequency. Of course depending on where you live and what else is using the 2.4ghz frequency you might have few channels left and in any case clearly being able to use 802.11n 5ghz concurrently with 802.11n/b/g 2.4 ghz is likely to be an advantage particularly if you want to use the b/g however it's an important distinction. [1] [2] [3] Nil Einne (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I already said that more or less BTW. Nil Einne (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Word Spanish Thesaurus embarrassment?[edit]

Ran across a random uncited sentence in a corporate training manual: Microsoft, for example, suffered a great deal of embarrassment when the thesaurus for Word was too rigidly translated into Spanish. The result was a number of inappropriate synonyms that offended cultural, ethnic, and gender groups. Never heard of this and the wiki article on MS Word doesn't mention it. Is this documented anywhere? Can't openly search the big G from my workstation... 218.25.32.210 (talk) 02:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With a little bit of web-sleuthing, I found some old articles from newspapers that confirm that this did indeed happen, like this article from the Seattle Times, published in 1996:

Microsoft is taking steps to remove offensive translations from its Spanish-language word-processing software, while cranking up a public-relations campaign from Mexico to Spain to apologize.

The steps came as Mexican officials responded with outrage at news reports that the thesaurus in the Spanish-language edition of Microsoft Word lists such words as "man-eater" and "savage" as synonyms for "Indian." Mexico and other Latin American countries have large populations descended from native Indians.

For the word "lesbian," meanwhile, the thesaurus listed "pervert" and "depraved person." The word "Western," by contrast, drew synonyms such as "Aryan," "white" and "civilized."

Now, that's an oopsie. 83.250.236.212 (talk) 03:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[4] this gives examples of English synonyms Nil Einne (talk) 15:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture priview while uploding[edit]

i am trying to find a code that make me the pictures appear in a list after uploading —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhoola Pakistani (talk • contribs) 15:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can't help answer this question unless you explain where you are uploading to (i.e. which website), and what tool you are using to upload (e.g. is the uploader built in to your web browser as a plugin, or are you using a separate piece of software like an FTP client?) If you can answer these questions, we might be able to help. Nimur (talk) 15:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not even sure they mean uploading from their computer to a website. They could mean uploading from a digital camera to their computer, for example. StuRat (talk) 13:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IE7 Link Icons query[edit]

Just setting up a corporate laptop which doesn't permit Firefox (boo hiss). I have a liking for a links toolbar composed of a set of favicons each with with no additional description. IE appears to be a bit dense, and does not permit me to rename the link to "", such that I'm left only with the perfectly informative icon. Nor will it accept " ". Stupid IE. Any suggestions for a solution? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right click on the toolbar to choose between "Show icons and text", "Show only selective text," or "show only icons." Depending on some details, this may be under the sub-context-menu "Customize" or elsewhere in your preferences. This forum illustrates for IE7; your version may vary slightly. (Note that the link name will still show up as a mouse-over tooltip - so it's helpful to have a descriptive name, as opposed to "" or " " ). Nimur (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nimur. The option, in my case, is found under Customize Command Bar. Sadly ticking "Show only icons" seems to have no effect - the link name still shows up. Have double & triple checked that "Show only icons" is ticked, and have bounced IE just in case. Most odd. Experimenting, the verious options appear to affect the Home, Print, Tools type icons, but not link icons :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I can't confirm at the moment. It is possible that there are separate text/icon-only settings for the main toolbar and the links/bookmarks toolbar... can you try right-clicking on the links-bar itself? Nimur (talk) 20:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll crank it up again in the morning - 8 hours or so from now. I'm pretty certain I was right-clicking on the links bar, which would imply a one-size-fits-all text/icon-only settings not encompassing the ability to have favicons sans descriptive text :( But thanks for your continued interest, N. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. one size fits all. Right clicking on links shows that the setting is Icons only, but that is ignored by the links toolbar :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm out of ideas. Consider upgrading to Internet Explorer 8, where this specifically does work on the links bar. Nimur (talk) 13:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll have to wait for IE8 to pop out through the corporate approvals process, the workings of which are opaque. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GMAIL redirecting to a particular folder messages coming from a particular sender[edit]

Hi. I've just subscribed to the mailing list wireshark-users and it's interesting but it's also clogging up my Gmail account. I'd like to redirect all messages coming from the mailing list to a folder in my Inbox, so that I can tidy it up a little. Is that possible? Thank you very much! --Belchman (talk) 16:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike other e-mail services, GMail uses search rather than folders. The closest thing GMail has to folders is "labels". Find the "Create new label" link and create a "wireshark-users" label. You're going to order GMail to automatically put this label on all e-mails from the Wireshark mailbot. After creating the label, click "Create a filter" toward the top of the screen, then in the "From" field, enter the e-mail address of the mailbot that sends you the e-mails; then click "Next". Then you can choose what to do with all these messages. If you want to shove them out of your inbox you can have them all put directly into your archive without ever touching the Inbox. You should also choose to put your new "wireshark-users" label on such e-mails. Now on the main GMail screen you can click the "wireshark-users" link on the left and GMail will show all the e-mails (both in your Inbox and in the Archive) with that label. Alternatively, you can avoid the whole "labels" thing, and just use the filter to shove to the Archive all e-mails that come in from that address; and when you want to see all the wireshark-users e-mails, just type "wireshark-users" in the Search field Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're awesome. Thank you very much. --Belchman (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Computer programming job[edit]

This may be a humanities question - if so, please move it. Is computer programmer normally listed as a trade profession or skilled labor profession? -- kainaw ™ 19:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A profession is neither skilled labour nor a trade - I think you mean "job" or "career". 92.24.128.70 (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For some time, Stanford University considered Computer Science a "vocational trade" - and so it did not form a department until 1965 (it was still considered a bit of a black-sheep in an otherwise "academic" institution). Ironically, this department founded much of the modern field we now know as computer science and computer engineering. This article, What Is Computer Science, Anyway?, discusses the categorization of Computer Science as a vocational or professional track (in the context of race and socioeconomic factors in education). In general, it depends who you ask, and in what context. A computer programming job can run the gamut from "technician" to "master designer" - so it's hard to make a total generalization. I would consider a programmer career track that requires a four-year degree a "professional career track", and anything that accepts less than a four-year degree as a "vocational career track" (without passing any judgement on the merits of either career track - we need both types of individuals to make good software). (Also note the important distinction between computer science and computer programming). Nimur (talk) 20:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the Bureau of Labor Statistics is in agreement with me: see Computer Control Programmers and Operators (vocational) or Computer Support Specialists and Systems Administrators; and Computer Programmer (professional) - although their cutoff is at the two-year degree level, with some caveats. Nimur (talk) 20:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That is a much better answer than mine. This is why I think it is acceptable (and good) to forward questions from my class to the RD here. The students will get much more than "What I think is..." answers. -- kainaw ™ 23:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should send them here directly to introduce more people to this resource. The RD is the best place I've found on the web to ask general questions and have a chance at getting a reasonably informed answer. --Sean 13:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2009 October 12